but same time keeping in mind that unhealthy networks can be lead to bribery.
An old boys’ network is a network based on promoting and sharing mutual and often unreasonable interests of a certain group, that is usually closed from outsiders and has secret operating principles. Loyalty of the group is based on reciprocity, indebtedness and favoring. The old boys’ networks vary between different societies and cultures. For example in Japan, old boys’ network refers to the leading politicians and public officers who by transferring to the private sector also take their old associates and contacts with them. In British culture old boys’ networks refer to influential former pupils of certain elite private schools that after graduation still have close relations.
Perceived problems
Situation, where an old boys’ network usually becomes problematic is that it distorts competition of resources. The networks can advocate benefits to certain parties in order to speed up a process or bend certain limits for getting more favourable outcomes to the persons inside the network. These kind of actions are often based on dishonest procedures and deception. Decision situations, where the same persons take part in preparation, conclusion and implementation of something that benefits themselves, are especially susceptible to old boys’ networks. For example in regional and local administration public procurement, planning and construction are areas, where the double roles of politics and economics often meet and lead to collision of interests. Another field that is susceptible to this kind of corruption are small communities and organisations that are used to functioning outside the public control and that offer remarkable financial benefits. If the ethical code of conduct of large corporations do not have any regulations concerning company bonus system, the risks are also high.
The main ethical problem that is posed by the old boys’ networks is favouring. Favouring leads deterioration of moral and it compromises the feeling of even-handedness and neutrality, whether we are talking about public services, business or local government. It turns the public good into private benefit. There are many different forms of favouring. One form of it is the favouring of friends, acquaintances and so called insiders. The scandals with election funds are an example of networks that have tried to get beneficial arrangements through long reaching personal contacts. Favouring family and relatives happens as well, but it can become unhealthy when a person is trying to affect the human resources department in order to get the favoured person hired. In the field of politics a form of favouring are the nominations to political posts that can negatively affect the competence and performance of the companies involved.
Are these networks scientifically measurable?
Different corruption indexes, for example CPI, do not recognise or investigate the kind of corruption that old boys’ networks present. The networks are considered as hidden corruption, so it is very hard to get information of them through scientific research. That is why many of these problems are still only measured as perceptions or speculations. A more comprehensive picture of the networks will only be met when more scientific research on corruption reaches public discussion. The following scientific approaches and research questions could be used when assessing old boys’ networks:
The use of meta analysis: What is the theoretical background behind the phenomenon? What are the scientific origins of it?
Is there any comparative data available from other countries, cultures and systems? Can any generalizations be made based on them?
Are the research methods diverse enough? The observations and interpretations cannot rest on only one method.
The research of old cases should be used. Remarkable cases and their judicial processes reveal special characteristics and features of the case and provide an insight to the public discussion about the judicial processes and morality of the society.
The research should try to point out the prevalence of corruption with perception based studies and find out how much the citizens trust the public administration.
The utility and usability of the research. Could the report be used to identify for example ethical problems in working communities or help to find out better surveillance methods in order to fight corruption?[1]
Old boys’ networks in Finland
When collecting answers from citizens in Finland, old boys’ networks are seen as the worst form of corruption in country. Also many citizens have plenty of own experiences of this kind networks according to the questionnaires, including favouring of friends and incapacity caused by membership of different kinds of ideological groups[2] .
The debate and public awareness about old boys’ networks and especially personal relations between businessmen and politicians has grown due to a number of cases where some have involved the construction sector. In 2012 the former Foreign Minister Ilkka Kanerva was found guilty of aggravated bribery and abuse of office committed between 2006 and 2008, while he was serving as a chairman of the Regional Council of Southwest Finland and where he had decision making power over land management and zoning. He was sentenced after the court found out that four property developers had contributed around 50 000 euros to Kanerva’s election campaign fund and a birthday celebration, hoping to get favourable decisions on zoning matters from regional council. How ever the sentences where later overturned because the Court of Appeal found no evidence of bribery[3]
In 2009 Finnish foundation ”Nuorisosäätiö” was in headlines after funding elections of the Centre party and giving benefits in the spirit of political reciprocity. Nuorisosäätiö distributed an overall amount of 90 000 euros of election support money, that according to the prosecutor and the Finnish Trade Register is against the rules of the foundation. The chairman of the foundation, Antti Kaikkonen, has according to the prosecutor also been granting the benefits also to himself. The bribery claims cover for example an painting worth of tens of thousands of euros. The paintings were bought from Jukka Vihriälä, the chairman of Finland's Slot Machine Association RAY (Raha-automaattiyhdistys), who on his behalf have made decisions about giving benefits to foundation that bought the paintings. The chairman of Nuorisosäätiö had also been given elections funds from other foundations that have received grants from RAY. Both were sentenced in 2013 to probation, Antti Kaikkonen for 5 months and Jukka Vihriälä for 1,5 years.[4]
^ Salminen & Mäntysalo (2012). Old boy Networks and Administrative Corruption: Case of External Election Finance In Finland. Paper presented in the annual conference of Euro- pean Group of Public Administration, Bergen, Norway (9/2012)
^ Salminen, A., & Ikola-Norrbacka, R. (2009). Kuullaanko meitä. Eettinen hallinto ja kansalaiset.[Are we being heard.
Salminen & Mäntysalo (2013). Epäeettisestä tuomittavaan: korruptio ja hyvä veli -verkostot Suomessa. Reports 182, University of Vaasa, ISBN 978–952–476–428–5
Definition
A common definition of corruption includes dishonesty, bribery and moral deterioration. Old boys’ networks are often seen as form of mild corruption,Table of Contents
An old boys’ network is a network based on promoting and sharing mutual and often unreasonable interests of a certain group, that is usually closed from outsiders and has secret operating principles. Loyalty of the group is based on reciprocity, indebtedness and favoring. The old boys’ networks vary between different societies and cultures. For example in Japan, old boys’ network refers to the leading politicians and public officers who by transferring to the private sector also take their old associates and contacts with them. In British culture old boys’ networks refer to influential former pupils of certain elite private schools that after graduation still have close relations.
Perceived problems
Situation, where an old boys’ network usually becomes problematic is that it distorts competition of resources. The networks can advocate benefits to certain parties in order to speed up a process or bend certain limits for getting more favourable outcomes to the persons inside the network. These kind of actions are often based on dishonest procedures and deception. Decision situations, where the same persons take part in preparation, conclusion and implementation of something that benefits themselves, are especially susceptible to old boys’ networks. For example in regional and local administration public procurement, planning and construction are areas, where the double roles of politics and economics often meet and lead to collision of interests. Another field that is susceptible to this kind of corruption are small communities and organisations that are used to functioning outside the public control and that offer remarkable financial benefits. If the ethical code of conduct of large corporations do not have any regulations concerning company bonus system, the risks are also high.The main ethical problem that is posed by the old boys’ networks is favouring. Favouring leads deterioration of moral and it compromises the feeling of even-handedness and neutrality, whether we are talking about public services, business or local government. It turns the public good into private benefit. There are many different forms of favouring. One form of it is the favouring of friends, acquaintances and so called insiders. The scandals with election funds are an example of networks that have tried to get beneficial arrangements through long reaching personal contacts. Favouring family and relatives happens as well, but it can become unhealthy when a person is trying to affect the human resources department in order to get the favoured person hired. In the field of politics a form of favouring are the nominations to political posts that can negatively affect the competence and performance of the companies involved.
Are these networks scientifically measurable?
Different corruption indexes, for example CPI, do not recognise or investigate the kind of corruption that old boys’ networks present. The networks are considered as hidden corruption, so it is very hard to get information of them through scientific research. That is why many of these problems are still only measured as perceptions or speculations. A more comprehensive picture of the networks will only be met when more scientific research on corruption reaches public discussion. The following scientific approaches and research questions could be used when assessing old boys’ networks:
Old boys’ networks in Finland
When collecting answers from citizens in Finland, old boys’ networks are seen as the worst form of corruption in country. Also many citizens have plenty of own experiences of this kind networks according to the questionnaires, including favouring of friends and incapacity caused by membership of different kinds of ideological groups[2] .
The debate and public awareness about old boys’ networks and especially personal relations between businessmen and politicians has grown due to a number of cases where some have involved the construction sector. In 2012 the former Foreign Minister Ilkka Kanerva was found guilty of aggravated bribery and abuse of office committed between 2006 and 2008, while he was serving as a chairman of the Regional Council of Southwest Finland and where he had decision making power over land management and zoning. He was sentenced after the court found out that four property developers had contributed around 50 000 euros to Kanerva’s election campaign fund and a birthday celebration, hoping to get favourable decisions on zoning matters from regional council. How ever the sentences where later overturned because the Court of Appeal found no evidence of bribery[3]
In 2009 Finnish foundation ”Nuorisosäätiö” was in headlines after funding elections of the Centre party and giving benefits in the spirit of political reciprocity. Nuorisosäätiö distributed an overall amount of 90 000 euros of election support money, that according to the prosecutor and the Finnish Trade Register is against the rules of the foundation. The chairman of the foundation, Antti Kaikkonen, has according to the prosecutor also been granting the benefits also to himself. The bribery claims cover for example an painting worth of tens of thousands of euros. The paintings were bought from Jukka Vihriälä, the chairman of Finland's Slot Machine Association RAY (Raha-automaattiyhdistys), who on his behalf have made decisions about giving benefits to foundation that bought the paintings. The chairman of Nuorisosäätiö had also been given elections funds from other foundations that have received grants from RAY. Both were sentenced in 2013 to probation, Antti Kaikkonen for 5 months and Jukka Vihriälä for 1,5 years.[4]
http://www.business-anti-corruption.com/country-profiles/europe-central-asia/finland/corruption-levels/land-administration.aspx
Salminen & Mäntysalo (2013). Epäeettisestä tuomittavaan: korruptio ja hyvä veli -verkostot Suomessa. Reports 182, University of Vaasa, ISBN 978–952–476–428–5